I agree Fred....real easy for the 20-30 year old athletes.....I was pretty strong then too. Now in my age bracket towards the downward slope of life expectancy....broken down backs,joints well used up....and Im lucky to not have a disabling condition like diabetes or major heart issues......for these folks,get real,its bug in time.

I can get hundreds of miles away in the truck,no roads,not happening.

Soon as you add this to any argument, your "math" goes right out the window.

I don't have any experience evacuating over long distances from a disaster, but I have done some long distance hiking in my youth. So comparing this survival with my experience and knowledge of thru-hiking and this is what you get:

Statistically, people starting the Appalachian trail, without prior training, is 9.5 miles per day, while a hiker that has rigorously trained will average 12.8 MPD. The top average after a month on the trail for both groups was 16 MPD, but the conditioned hikers hit this peak earlier. A good reference for this is Long-Distance Hiking: Lessons from the Appalachian Trail by Roland Mueser.

So a conservative estimate would put 400 miles at around 35 days. Weight loss is inevitable, and probably beneficial for most of us (certainly for me). But lack of adequate supplies of protien and fat over time will lead to strength and endurance loss, impaired critical thinking and higher risk for injuries. Carbs, sugar and endorphins can only take you so far. Most male AT hikers lose both fat and muscle mass during their hike due to insufficient food intake.

I would never rely on MRE's for bug-out food supplies. The caloric value doesn't balance out the weight and bulk problems. Lightweight, high-value foods such as jerky, air-cured sausages, nuts, oatmeal, beans, brown rice, whole-wheat pasta and hard cheeses are typical fare for thru-hikers and would work just as well in long-distance bug-out hike. Peanut butter, Nutella and chocolate are also popular hiking foods (though I question the value of chocolate). Most thru-hikers (including myself) budget around 1.5 lbs of food per day per person, but many claim that 1 lb is enough. Even thru-hikers don't carry more than 10 days of food due to size and weight concerns.

At my age and current condition, the possibility of traveling 400 miles by foot is unrealistic without outside assistance. Fortunately, I don't live in an area where I believe my threat types and damage radius extends that far that rapidly. So my survival plans are more focused on shelter-in-place and/or traveling more achievable distances, preferably in or on a motor vehicle, which doesn't necessarily require pavement. This presents two advantages: lower caloric needs to support lower activity levels and better cargo carrying abilities. Of course there are other potential risks with this plan. Hopefully the church and Boy Scouts will be there if my plans don't work out. ;-)

This does indeed seems like a slam a what was a very productive and interesting thread , in which the OP was seeking comment, feedback, and information.

Hopelessly impractical? Well, certainly challenging, but let me cite a it of recent family history - to be precise, my wife's.

In 1918, her grandmother,living in Moscow and married to an officer in the Imperial Russian Army, was training to be a lady-in-waiting to the Czarina - not a good career move at that time.

They left in a hurry moving east through Siberia. My father-in-law was born in Ulan Bator, Mongolia, in 1920. At one point, they were saved from capture only when the dog sled carrying the family valuables overturned, distracting their pursuers. They often swapped sewing needles for provisions in poverty-stricken villages along the way.

My FIL, by way of Shanghai and Seattle, wound up at Hollywood High, where he double dated with Jean Harlow, fought in the South Pacific in WWII, and fathered and raised the most gorgeous and intelligent lady in the universe.

Those are just the highlights, and it certainly is an epic. I'll bet they would have been happy to trade it for a mere 400 mile ramble in the eastern US.

If I were to plan for the original scenario, I would adopt a hybrid strategy - let's start in the vehicle, but carry along enough that we can switch to bike or foot, or charter a helo (whatever). You never know what will come up down the way.

Nice, Hikermor. The human body can surprise you, either way, when the chips are down. Impractical, difficult, damn near impossible, yes. You just don't know what you can or will do until faced with the situation. I would take some lessons from the North Vietnamese who pushed loaded bikes down the Ho Chi Minh trail. With an extension on the handlebars, a heavily loaded bike can be managed for long distances in difficult terrain. That is pushing the bike, not riding it. The Japanese used the same technique in WWII and accomplished what the British thought was impossible. A bike can carry a lot of food.

I will not bore you all with war stories, but I have done some extreme distances with heavy loads before. It seemed impossible at the time, but I survived. I was younger and leaner then though.

Not sure if the "slam" comment was directed at me specifically, but that wasn't the intent of my comment.

What I was trying to get at was that food isn't necessarily so important, since most of us carry around spare calories...is it going to be comfortable and fun, no.

Let me illustrate what I see as the problem that's being overlooked:

1 gallon of water weighs 8.35 lbs

The min amount that I normally see mentioned to keep the human body functioning every day is 1 qt or 2.08 lbs (approx), so for 16 days at 1 qt you'll be needing 33.4 lbs of water...not so bad. But wait, that's just to keep the body alive, so if you're going to be exerting yourself (sweating) maybe you'll need more water...say 1 gal. So now for 16 days you'll be looking at 133.6 lbs of just water.

And if you're looking at 35 days of walking:

1 qt/day=73.1 lbs, 1 gal/day=292.25 lbs

Would you be able to source some water enroute? Probably, but I see water as the main issue for surviving this scenario not food. Would the food be wonderful at making things better, absolutely!

The human body is capable of fantastic feats, as history shows us that's absolutely true. However, how many more common examples are there from when things didn't work out so well? I'm pretty sure those numbers would dwarf the success/survival examples throughout history.

And nowdays peoples idea of hardship, really isn't.

So, overall I think this scenario looks bleak for most folks. Would there be stories of incredible survival against the odds, undoubtedly...but they'll be the exception not the rule.

My 2 cents worth...

Bike with modified trailer ( carries food, camp gear child, puppy)

8 mph x 10 hours / day = 80 miles

80x5 days = 400 mi

5 days = 15 mre's ~ 15#

I have to admit, I'm a little taken aback by the "It's impossible!" thinking of some people in this group. It's so intense that we now have a seperate thread devoted solely to slamming the OP?! Come on!

Ok, so if this big, ugly, hairy, scary situation ever happened, you would just dig in and not even consider such a trek, no matter what. We got it.

Nobody said it would be easy. It's impractical, sure, but that's what makes the thought exercise so practical. I'm pretty sure the OP stated that this isn't the be all and end all of her preps, but rather one level of preparedness she's working on. Never did she say this is her only plan or the only scenario she's working on.

This scenario might never happen, but in working on a plan for it, might the OP actually be better prepped for more realistic situations? I think so. It's all about finding solutions. Can you carry 400 miles worth of water on your back? No. But you can carry to means to make 400 miles worth of water. If you're prepared to make 400 miles worth of water, would you be better off in a bug-in scenario? You bet you would!

There's a solution to every problem so why don't we focus on those, instead of slamming the OP. If you have nothing to add to that discussion then I recommend taking my Grandpa's advice and zipping your lip.

If questioning what I see as a serious flaw in the plan isn't adding to the discussion, but considered slamming...ok I'll move on and won't bother you kind folks ever again.

Fred,I dont think it was directed at you ,hope you stay and cont to offer your views.

As if anyone cares what I think,just a friendly reply to you.

I thought the replies were valid in all forms.Then again,I dont have problems accepting a comment FWIW,or not,for that matter,I respect all have opinions as valid as any other.

As for the OP in the beginning,dont care to go there either way.It is what it is as one may choose to interpret.